Doctors Say No to GMOs

by Jeffrey M. Smith

When given a choice animals—both wild and domesticated—instinctively avoid genetically modified corn.

As the farmer threw a scoop of corn on the ground and called his pigs, he told his guest, “Watch this.” The pigs ran frantically towards the corn, sniffed it, then stared back at the farmer and refused to eat. The farmer then scooped corn from another bin and flung it nearby. The pigs ran over and devoured it.

It’s not just pigs. Chickens in South Africa, buffalo in India, geese in Illinois, as well as elk, deer, raccoons, squirrels, mice, and rats have all be seen avoiding genetically modified organisms (GMOs) when given a choice.

Doctors Prescribe “No GMOs”

No one knows why animals refuse GMOs, but according to the American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM), people should follow their example. AAEM cites a host of problems in lab animals fed GMOs, including infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, dysfunctional insulin and cholesterol regulation, and damage to major organs and the gastrointestinal system. They called on physicians to prescribe non-GMO diets to all patients.

“Physicians are probably seeing the effects in their patients, but need to know how to ask the right questions,” says former AAEM President Dr. Jennifer Armstrong. In fact, many experts believe that when GMOs were introduced in 1996, they were a major factor in the subsequent upsurge in disorders, which included chronic illnesses, allergies, autism, infertility, diabetes, and infant health problems.

Poison Producers

The five major genetically modified (GM) food crops are soy, corn, cotton, canola, and sugar beets. All are engineered to drink poison. They’re outfitted with bacterial genes that allow them to survive deadly doses of toxic herbicide.

Some GM varieties of corn and cotton are poison producers, equipped with a gene from the soil bacterium Bacillus thuringiensis to produce insect-killing Bt-toxin. The bacterium by itself has been used for decades as a pesticide. When it was dispersed by plane to kill gypsy moths in Washington and Vancouver, about 500 people reported allergy or flu-like symptoms. Now these same symptoms are being reported by thousands of Indian farm workers who handle Bt cotton—which is engineered to produce a more toxic version of the spray within every plant cell. Moreover, thousands of Indian sheep, buffalo, and goats died after grazing on Bt cotton plants. I visited one village where all 13 buffalo died after eating Bt cotton plants for a single day. They had been eating natural cotton plants for years without incident.

About two dozen U.S. farmers say thousands of pigs or cows became sterile from Bt corn varieties. And the corn is implicated in deaths of cows, horses, water buffaloes, and chickens. Numerous rodent studies show that Bt corn causes immune reactions and signs of toxicity.

Dangers of GM Soy

Ohio allergist Dr. John Boyles says, “I used to test for soy allergies all the time, but now that soy is genetically engineered, it is so dangerous that I tell people never to eat it.”

The danger is greater for pregnant moms and children. After GM soy was fed to female rats, most of their babies died—compared to a 10 percent deaths among controls fed natural soy. GM-fed babies were smaller and possibly infertile.

According to documents released from a lawsuit, FDA scientists repeatedly warned that GM foods can create hard-to-detect allergies, poisons, new diseases, and nutritional problems. But the first Bush White House ordered the agency to promote biotechnology. So they brought in Michael Taylor, the former attorney of biotech giant Monsanto, to head up the FDA’s GMO policy. That policy ignored the scientists and declares that Monsanto and others can determine if their own foods are safe. There are no required safety studies. After leaving the FDA, Taylor later became Monsanto’s vice president. In 2009, he was reinstalled at the FDA as the U.S. Food Safety Czar.

Consumer Rejection of GMOs

Let’s learn our lesson from the animals and take the doctors’ advice. If even a small percentage of U.S. consumers rejected them—perhaps 5 percent, food companies would quickly replace GM ingredients. In Europe, when the tipping point was achieved in April 1999, within a week virtually all major food companies committed to stop using GMOs. U.S. consumer concerns about the cancer link from GM bovine growth hormone in milk has kicked it out of products by Wal-Mart, Starbucks, Dannon, Yoplait, and most U.S. dairies.

The Institute for Responsible Technology’s Campaign for Healthier Eating in America is engineering a tipping point against GMOs in the U.S.—and it’s taking off. The fastest growing claim among store brands in 2009 was “GMO-Free,” and Supermarket News predicts that 2010 will see an unprecedented upsurge in consumer concern about GMOs. Visit www.ResponsibleTechnology.org to reclaim an Non-GMO food supply

Please explain your voting method. I do not understand vote up, vote down. Do you mean up for GMO's, Down for no GMO's or vote uo for labeling or down for labeling... or vice versa or what? You would probably have a lot more people vote if they knew why & what. Please continue the information. Good writing & reporting! All life depends on whether this monster if stopped or not as it effects, affects and infects our water suppy as well as soil and those of us who eat!

report abuse

vote down

vote up

Votes: +1

...written by Metje Butler,
February 16, 2013

Whether or not it's proven harmful, the citizens have the right to know when they're offered GMO food, for makeing their own decisions. The companies (ie Monsanto) are afraid to trust the public with this knowlege because their food is flawed and they know it.

Additionally, Monsanto gives even more reason to be distrusted, in that they deliberately designed seeds to be life-less, to force farmers, (contrary to the past when farmers would save their own seeds to help in their own prosprerity) to re-buy them annually...for the benefit of the Monsanto Company.

Dear Editor: In California in November voters will consider Proposition 37 to establish if they wish to require labeling of food products containing GMOs (Genetically Modified Organisms). Monsanto provides most GMO seeds which include Roundup Ready (RR) soy, corn, canola, sugar beets and more. Many RR crops are genetically engineered to survive insects and spraying with Roundup herbicide during weed abatement efforts. Monsanto asserts that GMO laden food requires no labeling because ‘they have not been proven to be harmful’. Industry insiders, the FDA, EPA .et al remain so infused with employees from each other’s organizations that consumer safeguards are severely compromised. Example: The FDA recruited Michael Taylor, a Monsanto attorney, to manage the creation of its GMO policy, a policy in effect today that empowers biotechnology companies to establish if their GMOs are nontoxic. Taylor then departed the FDA to become Monsanto’s vice president.

Since the introduction of GMOs in the 1990s rates of autism, allergies, obesity, cancer and assorted health issues have soared. There is no definitive proof indicting GMOs; nevertheless the biotechnology industry is circumventing labeling that would facilitate the necessary research. Why? Is there a stench here reminiscent of tobacco companies?

Independent research and case studies raise alarms worldwide. Many RR GMO crops have genes inserted into their DNA structure that manufactures an insect-killing toxin known as Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt) in every plant cell; insects ingest the plant and poison tears open their stomach to exterminate them. Bt produced from soil bacteria has been employed by organic farmers as a spray for natural insect control for decades. The primary distinction here is that Bt-toxin in GMO plants is thousands of times more potent than Bt spray and can never be washed off the plant prior to eating like the spray version. Several studies confirm that the GMO Bt toxin survives the human digestive process as well. In May 2011, the Canadian journal Reproductive Toxicology published a study revealing the following: 93% of the pregnant women they tested had Monsanto’s corn derived Bt-toxin in their blood; 80% of their unborn fetuses did as well. Autism related? Again there is uncertainty.

The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) recently warned physicians “to educate their patients, the medical community, and the public to avoid GM foods when possible….,”further stating “Several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food,” including infertility, immune problems and gastrointestinal issues, concluding that “There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. There is causation.”

Ohio allergist Dr. John Boyles asserted “…now that soy is genetically engineered, it is so dangerous that I tell people never to eat it.” Salk Institute biologist David Shubert cautions that “children are the most likely to be adversely effected by toxins and other dietary problems” related to GM foods. In March 2006, Dr. Irina Ermakova from the Russian Academy of Sciences published a report to the European Congress of Psychiatry disclosing that rats and their offspring fed GM soy displayed anxiety and aggression, while a control group fed non-GM soy failed to exhibit such aberrant behaviors. Similar health concerns prompted the American Medical Association on June 19, 2012 to call for mandatory pre-market safety testing of GMO foods.

Why are we learning of such concerns now? Media intimidation - Monsanto’s lawyeristic bullying behind the scenes for decades.

Before 1980, patent law did not apply to living organisms. Now farmers suffer bankruptcy after being devastatingly sued by Monsanto for cross-pollination of their non-GMO crops by neighboring GMO plants. Incredulous as it sounds, the exploitative use of patent law permitted Monsanto to successfully sue farmers for patent infringement, even though they never planted GMOs. The threat here is doubly apparent to organic farmers.

Consumers currently enjoy rights to determine which foods contain MSG, dyes, artificial sweeteners, peanuts and other additives that they want to avoid. It must be our right, not Monsanto’s, to determine likewise with GMOs. Polls confirm that a majority of Americans desire this. Such labeling is not costly but impending TV ads from Monsanto will endeavor to persuade you otherwise, much like Monsanto’s costly propaganda campaign to defeat Oregon’s 2002 GMO labeling measure.

What we are going to also have to consider with these foods is the dominoe effect. If they are toxic then they effect the Liver and Kidneys; and they are effected by the GMO foods then the other organs such as the brain, and heart are effected. Then it goes on from there. The metabolism breaks down and fat cannot be easily burned. This then causes fat levels in the body to grow and the Krebs cycle is not working properly for hypertraphie (Muscle Reproduction). I recomend to all my clients to not eat GMO foods and try to purchas organic foods. This is not a "Conspiracy Theory". Money is the game. Companies like Monsantor, Pioner, Farmland, and Dow are looking to make money from patening their GMO products. Due to this patening Farmers are forced to grow GMO Crops, because they can be sued if a trace of The patened gene is found in the organic or regular hybrid crops due to cross-polenation. Nice Huh? But yet we are the stupid sheep that allow our government to be ran by Corporate NWO Gangsters who should be tried and dealt with according to the laws of treason against the people of this country. We just don't care as long as we have our poisoned food and dancing with the Stars at dinner time. Wake up folks before it is too late!